Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2015-6-24Minutes for Tune 24 2015 adopted July 8 CONSERVATION COMMISSION PUBLIC MEETING 2 Bathing Beach Road Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554 www.nantucket- ma.gov Wednesday, June 24, 2015 4:00 P.M. 4 Fairgrounds Road, Training Room Commissioners: Ernie Steinauer (Chair), Sarah Oktay (Vice - chair), Andrew Bennett, _ Michael Glowacki, Ashley Erisman, David LaFleur, Ben Champoux Called to order at 4:00 p.m. Staff in attendance: Jeff Carlson, Natural Resources Coordinator Attending Members: Steinauer, Oktay, Glowacki, Erisman, LaFleur, Champoux Absent Members: Bennett Late Arrivals: None Earlier Departure: None Agenda adopted by unanimous consent *Matter has not been heard 1. PUBLIC MEETING A. Public Comment — None 1I. PUBLIC HEARING A. Notice of Intent 1. APG/ DRS Realty Trust — 80 & 84 Wauwinet Road (11 -89.2, 28) SE48 -2749 (Cont 07/08/2015) 2. Four Saratoga, LLC — 14 Tennessee Avenue (60.1.2 -6) SE48 -2773 (Cont 07/08/2015) 3. MNP, LLC — 17 Ames Avenue (60.2.4 -17) SE48 -2794 Sitting Steinauer, Oktay, Glowacki, Erisman, LaFleur, Champoux Recused None Documentation Supporting documents and plans. Representative Don Bracken, Bracken Engineering, Inc. — Changed to a pressure dist system per BOH. Public None Discussion (4:03) None Staff Have everything needed to close. Motion Motion to Close. (made by: Champoux) (seconded by: LaFleur) Vote Carried unanimously 4. *42 Union St LLC —11 Fayette Street (42.3.2 -28.2) SE48- (Cont 07/08/2015) 5. *Von Summer & Moller —10 Monomoy Creek Road (54 -54.2) SE48 -2797 Sitting Steinauer, Oktay, Glowacki, Erisman, LaFleur, Champoux Recused None Documentation Supporting documents and plans. Representative Brian Madden, LEC Environmental — Reviewed scope of project. Along the edge of the driveway is a gabion basket wall with timber to retain sediment. Resource areas, bordering vegetated wetlands, coastal bank, and flood plain are confirmed. The wall is in disrepair; propose to excavate a trench along the driveway and pull the wall out. Allocating an erosion control silt sock through the wetlands 3 feet up from the toe of slope and a 6" berm at the toe. The 8500 square feet of temporary wetland disturbance will be replanted with winterberry. The wall is to be eliminated and the slope regraded with an erosion control blanket to stabilize the slope near the wetland; loam and organic topsoil will be introduced as necessary. Disturbed areas will be monitored to ensure revegetation. Public Bruce Perry, Third -party Consultant Conservation Commission — Clarified that the area shown as revegetation and the silt fence running onto the neighboring lot is not part of the project. Work is going to be extremely close to the abutting property line; he finds it difficult to believe work won't spill over. Asked if this requires a waiver this close to bordering vegetated wetlands. Discussion (4:04) Glowacki — Asked if this land had been filled at one time. It looks like it has been filled. Madden — It is likely. Glowacki — Urged commissioners to take particular care to note that the plan addresses this NOI only. Erisman — Asked if the wall has received any maintenance. Madden — Doesn't look like it. Erisman —The wetland looks like it had perennial forb type things; would like some of forbs plugged into the planting plan to further replicate what is there. Champoux — There is a lot of contaminated soil out there; cautioned the representative to be aware of where the fill is coming from and to watch what crops up or gets spread. Page 1 of 6 Minutes for June 24 2015 adopted July 8 Oktay — Expressed concern about the proximity to the wetland and work being "tricky" though she believes it will be an improvement. Erisman — Asked when they are planning to do this work. Madden — Plan to start in the fall; if it gets too late in the season, he will talk to staff about stabilizing it over the winter. Staff The revegetated area is colored in and is similar to plan which will be seen later. This NOI is for the removal of the gabion basket wall. Monitoring and responding quickly to invasive species can be part of the conditions. Can also include in the order timing or work ending date and what level of siltation would be required over the winter if necessary. The waiver requested is for a long -term net benefit. Work on the abutting property is permitted under a separate duly notified NOI. Have everything needed to close. Motion Motion to Close. (made by: Oktay) (seconded by: LaFleur) Carried unanimously *Wesquo Capital Partners — 57 Washington Street (42.2.3 -37) SE48 -2796 Steinauer, Oktay, Glowacki, Erisman, LaFleur, Champoux Vote 6. Sitting Recused Documentation Representative Public None Supporting documents and plans. Paul Santos, Nantucket Surveyors — This is for additions to and relocation of the existing structure away from Washington Street within land subject to coastal storm flowage and the buffer to a coastal beach; it is outside the Massachusetts Natural Heritage endangered areas. No changes to the grade is proposed. He will be back with additional projects. None Discussion (4:20) Steinauer — Asked if, with the demolition of the other structure, there is a net reduction in ground cover. Staff Santos — Yes, but the owner is planning another structure on the property. Erisman — Concerned about the possible increase in runoff. Santos — There is a net reduction in ground cover. At the last meeting a different NOI on this same project was heard. Have everything needed to close. Motion Motion to Close. (made by: LaFleur) (seconded by: Champoux) Vote Carried unanimously 7. *Scricco — 155 Polpis Road (44 -14) SE48 -2800 Steinauer, Oktay, Glowacki, Erisman, LaFleur, Champoux Sitting Recused Documentation Representative Public Discussion (4:26) Staff Motion Vote Vote None Supporting documents and plans. Mark Rits, Site Design Engineering — For residential redevelopment of site including removal and new construction. All structural components will be outside the 50 -foot buffer to a bordering vegetated wetlands; existing septic is outside the 100 -foot buffer. They previously submitted a NIESA application and working are within that envelope; however, that MESA application doesn't cover the wetlands; they are waiting for that second review to be completed. Bruce Perry, Third -party Consultant Conservation Commission — Two weeks ago he checked the boundaries which are good. There is grade fill where the house will go causing a steep drop to the marsh. Oktay — Confirmed nothing will change in regards to distances. Erisman — That is a mowed meadow, not maintained lawn; expressed concern about rolling out sod. Rits — The existing lawn goes back a long way and was allowed to grow while the property was on the market. Erisman — Would like the landscaper to submit a soil testing under the best management practices (BNIP). Discussion about conditioning follow -ups to ensure the BMP are being adhered to and what actually- applies in this case. Waiting to hear from Massachusetts Natural Heritage. Continued to 7/8 without objection N/A Carried Page 2 of 6 Minutes for June 24, 201 8. *Town Of Nantucket — 34 Washington Street (42- 2.3.2) SE48 -2798 Sitting Steinauer, Oktay, Glowacki, Erisman, LaFleur, Champoux Recused None Documentation Supporting documents and plans. Representative David Smith, GZA GeoEnvironmental, Inc. — This is Phase II of the Town pier storm - damage repair project to replace timber floats along south side with more robust concrete floats within the same footprint, size, main float, and number of fingers; the 3X25 -foot outer finger will be replaced by an 8X30 - foot finger. Sixteen pressure - treated guide piles will anchor each fingers on the south side and four piles will anchor the main float; eight 14 -inch diameter piles will be removed, extended in height, and reused with the new floats to anchor the fingers; adding 22 new piles. Gangway and piers will remain. They want to maintain separation between bottom of to floats to the mud line in an extreme low -tide event so will have to dredge. That bottom material is fine sand with no contaminants; they will dredge, dewater onto a barge and off load onto trucks to be stockpiled at the landfill. Work will take place between November 1 and January 15 because of winter flounder. Will have a barge with an excavator and dredger scow and still kits and a turbidity curtain around the site. They submitted filing for a combined 401 water quality and Chapter 91 for this. Public Emily MacKinnon, Nantucket Land Council — Would like to better understand the Department of Marine Fisheries (DMF) about the survey and litigation before this is closed. Discussion (4:37) Oktay — Asked if during sampling for the sand if they did a search for creatures and eel grass. Smith — No; eel grass maps show it further off shore. Oktay — Paraphrased the Fisheries letter, which recommends an eel grass survey prior to dredging. Asked this be held open so everyone has time to read the DIIF letter and for a plan to be put in place to address Staff concerns. Smith — Asked for a continuance. Already have information about the eel grass from the prior NOI. Just today received a letter from Fisheries; it was too late to be included in the packet. Motion Continued to 7/8 without objection Vote N/A 9. *Town Of Nantucket — 15 Harbor View Way (42- 4.2.9) SE48 -2795 Steinauer, Oktay, Glowacki, Erisman, LaFleur, Champoux Sitting Recused Documentation Representative Public Discussion (4:53) Staff The representative has requested continuance Continued to 7/8 without objection N/A Amended Orders of Conditions Thompson- 14 Fargo Way (14 -17) SE48 -2645 Steinauer, Oktay, Glowacki, Erisman, LaFleur, Champoux None Supporting documents and plans. None None None Motion Vote B. Sitting Recused Documentation Representative Public Discussion (4:54) None Supporting documents and plans. Stan Humphries, Laurentide Environmental, LLC — Reviewed plans showing: as -built conditions, a survey, and classification of drain and nourishment areas. Barry Fogel, Keegan Werlin LLP Sarah Alger, Sarah F. Alger P.C., 78 Wauwinet Road Amanda Cross, of 78 Wauwinet Road Daniel Bailey, Rackemann Sawyer & Brewster, for Ms Cross Arthur D. Gasbarro, Blackwell and Associates Inc. Emily MacKinnon, Nantucket Land Council Bruce Perry, Third -party Consultant Conservation Commission Erisman — Asked about water infiltration up top and if anyone tried a rain garden or came up with a way to help infiltrate water on site rather than moving it away. Fogel — For water management, there is a proposal to plant some shrubs on the east side of the basin to create a boundary so that water in the basin will re- infiltrate and functions as a recharge area. Oktay — Referenced the representative's letter dated June 19 in which it is asked to keep a portion of the linear fence even with the top; she does not agree with allowing that linear fence to remain. Discussion about the requested change to keep a portion of the linear fence, the boulders, and the order of conditions. Erisman — In the construction notes, Condition 28 required a nourishment mix of 40% gravel, 40% sand, and 20% silt. Asked about that. Page 3 of 6 Minutes for June 24 2015 adopted July 8 Fogel — They are short on fill. The condition is for 40 -40 -20 but the analysis is 40 -56 -4. Want to discuss the mix in this amendment. Oktay — As this is part of an enforcement order, wants to know what the applicant was originally asked to do. Discussion about Condition 28 from the original order of conditions requiring 40 -40 -20 and other requirements detailed in the order of conditions. Humphries — There is still time within the period of the order to install the three small coir logs. This is the first year of construction and the owner wanted to observe the performance of the two rows with the fence and boulder during the winter. There was concern about overtopping of the two rows; all sand was removed from the first row; the second row was exposed in some places. Now Jr. Thompson questions whether or not he will have to go higher to address the additional, residual wave overtopping. Steinauer — Normally we try to reduce the amount of structural materials and now they are asking us to increase it. Oktay — Removal of the fence is necessary in her opinion. Fogel — Rationale for the fence is that it provides additional protection for the two structures especially the pre -1978 house and meets performance standards for that house; it also prevents debris from hitting the tubes. Discussion about what was permitted: no fence at all, just sand -filled tubes, fill, and nourishment. Erisman — Note that not building as designed is a failure criteria. Extra nourishment was added above what was proposed. Fogel — Would be willing to match the zig -zag drift fence at a lower profile at the left end of the property and asks to include that as an amendment at this time. Subject to further discussion, they are prepared to talk about modifying this to a zig -zag fence at the lowest profile. It's not like the work had an adverse effect that can't be undone. Alger — Asked the order be revoked or the structure built in compliance; they went well beyond the OofC and contends it has had a detrimental impact. Bailey — The enforcement order has been opened four months and nothing has happened and his client's property has been adversely impacted. It is very unstable. Asked for action: the board to compel the applicant to restore or get Town Counsel to revoke the order. Give them a short amount of time to bring it in compliance, if not fine them, if that doesn't bring that in compliance, revoke the order and make them remove it. Cross — Detailed the damage done to her property from the winter storms as a result of the structure. Now they are asking to keep the fence and add 10 more feet. Expressed her frustration. Gasbarro — Asked about the plantings which are an integral part of the stabilization process; noticed a difference between the approved plan and amended order; this doesn't show any plantings. Alger — Asked for seasonal restrictions on when work can be done on the beach; noted boulders have been moved around recently. Can't remember this board ever having approved a lateral fence with no separation; this has acted more like a bulkhead. Need to look at waiver requirements again. Gasbarro — They didn't establish an escrow account prior to construction as was required. Quarterly photos were supposed to be submitted June 2 but they aren't in the files. Surveying is just happening now. Alger — Also there was no report at the time of the storm as was required. Oktay — Would like to see compliance with order as written. MacKinnon — Submitted photos last July of conditions. Reviewed most recent letter, thinks it would be important for each member to review all the special conditions in the order as they were written, some conditions have not been complied with. At the last hearing, someone talked about looking more closely at the rolls to ensure they were constructed properly; asked the board do that. Fogel — Rebuttal. Contends -Mr. Thompson is responding to the enforcement order to comply with the order of conditions. This is the first year of a 3 -year order. Asked the board not to get punitive with him. Suggested the wetland has an outlet causing erosion to the unprotected area of Ms Cross bank. Cross — There is a pipe ending near the wetland pumping water across the road. This wasn't on the previous plans, but now it is. Fogel — Noted that this isn't basement sump water; this is water that collects in the driveway. It is coming out. Gasbarro — Asked if that surface drain is more unpermitted work. Would like to see proper permitted drainage. Sense of the board wants compliance. Glowacki — He thinks the hearing should be closed, deny the order, and prepare a memo of compliance to be agreed upon at the next hearing. They should have a short but reasonable amount of time to comply. Fogel — If going in direction of not issuing amendment, they will bring existing order up to snuff. Want's it to be without prejudice so they can come back for a request for a zig -zag. Page 4 of 6 Minutes for June 24 2015 adopted July 8 Staff Coastal engineering projects are designed to work as designed and can't pick and choose what aspects of the design as approved will be adhered to. The project that was constructed and worked through a season was not built in compliance with the order. There was a denial issued for a revetment. Options include: continue w amend process; order compliance by specific date; issue a fine; revoke the permit for failure to comply with conditions of the permit. Do keep in mind that the order of conditions are ConCom's compliance document, without which they have no teeth for enforcement Notion Motion to Close. (made by: Glowacki) (seconded by: Oktay) Vote Carried unanimously 2. Monomoy Creek RT — 12 Monomoy Creek RT (54 -54.1) SE48 -2665 Sitting Steinauer, Oktay, Glowacki, Erisman, LaFleur, Champoux Recused None Documentation Supporting documents and plans. Representative Brian Madden, LEC Environmental, Inc. — Amendment is for a new footprint. Resource areas are bordering vegetated wetlands transitioning to saltmarsh and harbor, coastal bank. Trying to maximize setback and minimize new structure in the buffer; there is a net reduction of structure in the 50 -foot buffer. Proposing to relocate the pool and cabana away from the buffer; lawn further consolidated; irrigation proposed for the lawn; any fertilizer use will comply with BMP. Proposing to revegetate existing lawn area with switch grass and supplement an area vegetated by dog bane. Due to high ground water, the proposed structure will have water proof slab. Work within 15 -feet of northern area will be allowed to grow back naturally. Requested a waiver for reduction of structure in setback no adverse impact and long- term net benefit. Reviewed the long -term net benefits. Reiterated there is a 360 -foot reduction of structure in the setback. Don Bracken, Bracken Engineering, Inc. Public Bruce Perry, Third -party Consultant Conservation Commission — Questions the long -term net benefit. Moving a house will have an adverse impact on the wetland and that needs to be mitigated. The other side of no adverse impact is no reasonable alternative; there is an alternative; this is a large lot with a lot of construction space. Discussion (5:51) Review and clarification of the proposed work as requested in the amendment. Glowacld — About technical consultant's suggestion that there is an alternative to the project and the idea that there is no conditioning that would allow the project go forward, in his view the standard is being applied incorrectly and perhaps Town Counsel should provide a ruling. He doesn't think the question is whether or not there is an alternative to the project. Steinauer — Doesn't see this as having a huge additional impact. Staff They have been granted waivers for the project on the grounds of no adverse impact /no reasonable alternative and under net benefit. Net benefit refers to revegetate of buffer and increase in separation. Read the criteria for no adverse impact. Recommend it be issued. Motion Motion to Issue. (made by: Glowacki) (seconded by: LaFleur) Vote Carried unanimously 111. PUBLIC MEETING A. Request for Determination of Applicability 1. None B. Minor Modifications 1. None C. Certificates of Compliance 1. Frazier— 33 Jefferson Avenue (30 -123) SE48 -215 (Cont. 07/08/2015) D. Orders of Condition (6:11) 1. Nantucket Land Bank — 158 Orange Street (55 -61.1) SE48 -2784 Sitting Steinauer, Oktay, Glowacki, Erisman, LaFleur, Champoux Staff Reconstruction of a walkway and pier. Siltation curtains to be installed; also require replanting in the saltmarsh. Discussion None Motion Motion to Issue as drafted. (made by: Oktay) (seconded by: LaFleur) Vote Carried unanimously 2. TNINP, LLC - 17 Ames Avenue (60.2.4 -17) SE48 -2794 Sitting Steinauer, Oktay, Glowacki, Erisman, LaFleur, Champoux Staff The work itself is within land subject to coastal storm flowage so added finding Nr 2 about the buffer zone. Added a condition that requires copy of the septic maintenance agreement be filed prior to issuance. Discussion None Motion Motion to Issue as drafted. (made by: Glowacki) (seconded by: Erisman) Vote Carried unanimously Page 5 of 6 Minutes for June 24 2015 adopted July 8 3. *Wesquo Capital Partners — 57 Washington St (42.2.3 -37) SE48 -2796 Sitting Steinauer, Oktay, Glowacki, Erisman, LaFleur, Champoux Staff Straight forward. Discussion Oktay — Found a typographical error. Motion Motion to Issue as amended. (made by: Oktay) (seconded by: Champoux) Vote Carried unanimously 4. *Von Summer & Moller — 10 Monomoy Creek Rd (54 -54.2) SE48 -2797 Sitting Steinauer, Oktay, Glowacki, Erisman, LaFleur, Champoux Staff Didn't draft an order. Aside from invasive species management and additional forbs, asked for thoughts. Discussion Oktay — Needs photo monitoring and fill sourcing requirements. A silt fence is important. Champoux — Would like a timeline on this project that allows it to germinate while the weather is still warm. Asked it be conditioned requesting an erosion blanket with hydro - seeding on top between August 15 and September 15. Erisman — Wants to know what the commission would do if they don't meeting the seeding date. Discussion about what would the applicant should do if the seeding date is missed. E. Enforcement Actions 1. None F. Other Business 1. Approval of Minutes: June 17, 2015. Review of necessary corrections. Motion to Approve as amended. (made by: Champoux) (seconded by: LaFleur) Carried unanimously 2. Reports: a. CPC, Erisman — Nothing to report. b. Mosquito Control Committee, Oktay — Nothing to report. 3. Commissioners Comment a. Steinauer — Would like the commission to receive a workshop on invasive species expert; there are experts here on island. Glowacki — wants to understand the process by which species are put on the list; the private group is not a government group and strips people of their rights, sycamore maple is an example. He doesn't think it's appropriate to have a non - governmental agency to have purview over what becomes law. Staff — Will schedule it for the fall. 4. Application Fees: Staff Update. Looking at what other Towns charge. Noted that the $25 by -law fee wouldn't be changed as that goes into the General Fund. The fee that would be best to adjust is the 3,d -party fee. 5. Administrator /Staff Report a. As of July 1, Natural Resources will have a fertilizer enforcement person. b. Explained problems faced when acting on enforcement orders. Discussion about establishing a list of enforcement issues. c. Office is closed July 3 so deadline is July 2. Motion to Adjourn: 6:39 p.m. Submitted by: Terry L. Norton Page 6 of 6